Why it’s so Hard to Vote: Electing Judges

I am going to vote early. Normally, I always wait until election day. In this town, you can’t be too careful. There’s always the chance for a last minute scandal. This year, I’m going to be out-of-town on election day, so I am forced to change.

I don’t do change well apparently. The “top of ticket” offices are all pretty clear to me, but it seems like 2/3rds of the ballot is judges and I know nothing about any of them. Why do we elect judges? Isn’t that like electing a doctor or engineer? Shouldn’t we just hire the most competent one?

After coaching for 36 years, I have lots of past swimmers who are attorneys, as are their partners and office mates. I sent a lot of them emails and asked their opinions on who the best candidates are. I was both surprised and pleased.

I was both surprised and pleased because neither my most progressive, nor my most conservative, alums urged me to vote by party. All of their recommendations crossed party lines. The progressives recommended a large number of Rs. The conservatives recommended and equal number of Ds. If practitioners don’t vote by party, why should we?

If it is an act of faith in a democracy that every office should be elective, does every office have to be partisan? We have done well with our city council electing and governing in a non-partisan manner. I felt that one of the key failings of the Castro administration was the breaking of that boundary. Clearly Cisneros and Hardberger were both Democrats, but they largely stayed away from those labels while in office. Couldn’t judges?

I was also surprised that the attorneys kept their recommendations largely positive. Unlike our TV ads, there was no negative campaigning. There was only one case where all of them selected a candidate because the incumbent was so bad. I was also surprised that in many cases, an equal number of attorneys recommended both candidates in a race…and for positive reasons.

There were two races where the incumbent “doesn’t like trials.” The attorneys were OK with that. The judges were fair and “equal opportunity abusers.” They were hard on both sides, making them prefer a settlement to a trial, where neither side would like the outcome. The judges wanted to respect the citizens’ time and not waste it on a jury for nothing.

It took me two weeks to get recommendations on all of the races. That is ridiculous. How is the average voter supposed to make these decisions? Fortunately, this isn’t middle school. I did the homework, but if you want to, you can copy. This is who a couple of dozen local attorneys recommended to me.

Chief Justice Supreme Court: Hecht (Those who practice school law felt that his experience with school finance could be critical in the coming school finance appeal.)Supreme Court 6: BrownSupreme Court 7: BenavidesSupreme Court 8: JohnsonCriminal Appeals 3: RichardsonCriminal Appeals 4: YearyCriminal Appeals 9: NewellChief Justice, 4th Court of Appeals: Marion (Attorneys seem to really like her previous work, although it doesn’t seem to directly apply to this bench.)45th District: Walsh144th District: Rummel150th District: McElhaney (Some attorneys who didn’t think much of her as an attorney were OK with her as a judge. Their reasoning appealed to the coach in me. “You might not be a great NBA player, but you can still be a great NBA ref.”)186th District: Green187th District: Hilbig (Big respect for competence and experience. Many, prosecutors and defense attorneys, even found him a great resource and mentor.)224th District: Stryker
Sakai (225th) and Harle (226th) are both unopposed…as it should be.227th District: Jimenez285th District: Price288th District: Casseb (The Republican most frequently endorsed by Democrats.)289th District: Austin290th District: One of those split decisions. Both Skinner and Pena have lots of fans. My poll gave it slightly to Skinner, but it was far from scientific. It looks like this is one of those races where there are two, excellent candidates.436th District: Jarrett
Lori Valenzuela is also unopposed for the 437th. Excellence is occasionally rewarded.County Court 1: AlonsoCounty Court 2: WolffCounty Court 3: Rodriguez (This is one of those cases where even the Rs sang high praises for this D judge. Many said that he was the best jurist in all the County Courts.)County Court 4: XimenezCounty Court 5: Pulliam (Again, both Rs and Ds hold this young judge in high regard.)County Court 6: ChristianCounty Court 7: WrightCounty Court 8: RodriguezCounty Court 9: Both Shelton and Quezada have lots of attorney support, but the consensus was that the incumbent (Shelton) does a good job and isn’t afraid to make hard decisions.County Court 10: CrouchCounty Court 11: KeyCounty Court 12: Another split decision here, with the slight edge to Longoria. It looks like both Roberts and Longoria are well respected candidates.County Court 13: GonzalezCounty Court 14: Back is split decision land. A (very) slight tilt to Acevedo, with many positive statements about Skinner.County Court 15: LaHood.Probate 1: Scharf-Zeldes (This is a very technical court and Scharf-Zeldes has years of experience in this aspect of the law.)

I’m retired. I have lots of lawyers who answer my calls and return my emails. It took me two weeks to get second hand information on which to cast my ballot. I’m happy to share it with you, but there has to be a better way.